Speedpaint skin video

#1

Allright, not Lightwave, still, I thought it showed some interesting clues on how skin behaves.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-TYO0cGFmQ

#2

wow, youve got skill budy…

#3

you’re joking right? That’s a reversed video of a photo being erased.

#4

yep, the man got some skills allright, here’s his webpage btw, http://www.chrisscalf.com

noticed he did some 3D modeling as well, in Lightwave.

#5

im gonna go out on a limb and say hes ok.

reason i say that is because you take a look at his fantasy pictures and the amount of dodge and burn the pictures seem to have, the poor colours, form, list goes on. and then you look at his photo real pictures, which look like bad photos with too much, and bad use of flash. im thinking that what you dont see in those timelapse videos is the frames ( or when he puts camtasia on pause ) where he reveals the actual photos to sample colours from, and make sure that his lines are lining up with the photos that he has on another layer during the timelapse you dont see that, and it looks legit.

you take a look at this

http://www.chrisscalf.com/illustration/update04.html

you take a look at the humans in this picture and then you compare this to…

http://www.chrisscalf.com/illustration/update05.html

which if being 100% legit and painted from reference on the side, or even from his head, would suggest that he really knows his stuff.

the two have such a quality difference that you cant fake. regardless if he spent more time on one or another, theres mistakes in the fantasy picture that suggest a person with little art experience compared to what the second suggests.

#6

It’s true, I watched some of his other videos and the quality is nowhere near as good as a lot of CG paintings. The original YouTube video also seems to jump in quality at one point from an ok rough painting to a photoreal picture in a few brush strokes.

I won’t deny that he’s far better than I’ll ever be but there’s something odd about the whole thing. Looking at his work, there’s no consistency. It’s as if several people have created the images on his site. Obviously people progress and adjust their technique as they learn new skills so maybe that’s all it is but there’s a massive difference between the different styles.

http://www.chrisscalf.com/illustration/illustration15.html

http://www.chrisscalf.com/illustration/illustration21.html

http://www.chrisscalf.com/illustration/illustration18.html

http://www.chrisscalf.com/illustration/tanjaacrylic.html

http://www.chrisscalf.com/illustration/layne.html

All of those pieces are of people but show them to anyone and I’ll put money on them thinking that each is produced by a different person. You can tell which ones he’s done from reference material and which he hasn’t, the Star Wars one is terrible.

#7

Well, even if he didn’t do it all, I guess this covers it?

© 2008 Chris Scalf Illustrations. All Artworks shown on this site are the property of Chris Scalf and/or their respective creators :deal:

#8

I’m on a roll…

Painting skin in ZB,
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/zbc/showthread.php?t=48840&page=1&pp=15

#9

That makes more sense

#10

Ouch.

I just wanted to drop in and have a chance to defend the legitimacy of my work… I don’t pretend to be the best artist in the world, (nor do I believe that I am). I am a very average artist who is trying to make his way in the world. I never went to any schools, so though my techniques are wierd, I do what I can to learn this stuff on my own. So I can definately handle the critisms. I find them to be very helpful! Makes me want to go back in and find out how I can make the work better. :slight_smile:

But the only thing I tend to find a bit painful are any type of insinuations that I’m a fraud. :frowning:

So I just want to hopefully convince those on here that I am indeed the guy who did all of that work you are speaking of. They are all completely freehand. There are no cut-out parts where I “cheat” in anyway…

What you see is exactly how it comes together.

And whatever I need to do to prove it, I’m ready. This is a great forum full of fantastically talented people, and I browse it all of the time as a lurker. The last thing I want is people on here who think I’m a flakey fraud. :-/

So please give me a chance to defend myself in some way. Give a chance to convince you.

There are reasonable explanations for certain inconsistencies in quality… It is all quite simply… Time.

Youtube for me is a place for me to doodle in between real projects and jobs. It’s quite simply a fun playground for me to try different things… But I don’t have a lot of time to give to paintings that I post on there, so I usually make it quick. Photo-real portraits are simply practice… I once posted a response to another viewer that I liken the process of practicing photo-realism to a guitarist who learns a song note-for-note from another musician’s cd. He does so for simple practice to make himself better.

Anyway… I hope those who have commented on here will give my comments some thought.

I would love to be able to ask for some input on the legit critisms on my work… But I need to be believed as “real” first.

Thanks!!

Chris Scalf

#11

© 2008 Chris Scalf Illustrations. All Artworks shown on this site are the property of Chris Scalf and/or their respective creators

The part that says “their respective creators” is put there to cover the intelectual property of any “work for hire” paintings I did. i.e. Comic book covers I was hired to do for Dark Horse Comics… It’s my art… But they own the copyright, and they art directed it. It’s their creation, their baby.

Same goes ESPECIALLY for all of the ad agency stuff that’s posted. The purchase orders directly state they they are the respective owners of all creative stuff we artists are hired to do. But there’s a blurb about being allowed to display the work only in a “portfolio” manner… Hence the legal wording.

#12 
its alright dude :) no harm done. i used to do the whole reference/ master copy thing myself about 15 years ago ( except it was me trying to copy the master painted marvel cards :D ). its a very legitimate way of trying to replicate certain effects that the master has done in his piece. if its a photo, its usable as well. i guess the only thing that is hard to believe is that you do phtooreal work with very little planning, which is why its hard to believe. even masters need to use things like measurements to make sure that all proportions are correct and in the proper place. which is why it would suggest that you somehow had some form of underlying photograph to work from on another layer, thats all.

again, no harm done. its good to be honest with the whole process, because not only is the public not decieved into thinking its easy, but the artist him/her self is not decieved either by the skill and knowledge required to do something like that with little or no reference and keeps the ego in check.

keep it up, and keep at it.

PS: as for time being a big reason between the quality difference. im not sure i would say its time that is at work here.

an artist that has a very good grasp of form, volume, etc, will be able to draw a good representation of the subject in as little as 15 seconds to 1 minute. you dont need a lot of time if you know very well where everything goes, and how things are shaped in that position. if you go to conceptart.org or any other speed paint/sketch thread you will notice that a lot of great artists will sketch their initial plan very quickly, and the rest of the work will be just refinement and or lighting.

what i was trying to say about the difference between the fantasy drawings and the photoreal drawings had not only difference in light and colour understanding, but also the form understanding as well. a person cant fake this regardless of the time that is needed, because if the original foundation is poor, then no amount of refinement will make it shine.

its like building a house, make sure that the foundation is solid first before moving on to the shading and lighting stage.

take a look at this.

http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=103360

the artist is 17 years old, and she is working a lot on making sure that the characters she draws look good at their simplest form. she is doing a lot of simple studies in which she gets better at all the time. eventually it will get to the point where she will be able to knock down those poses faster with less line work, and be more accurate. its these stages that i would suggest for you to work on more. even if its just 5-15 minutes every two days or so. eventually you will improve and the first foundation stages will get easy. that is when you move onto the next stage and work on longer sketches with secondary details, and try to make sure that everything is placed where it needs to be, and that the right muscles are flexed, relaxed. eventually you will get to the point where your foundation is soo strong, that even if you lay down completely flat colours over your piece, it will still be solid.

btw, i would recommend a few books for ya.
one is ALLA PRIMA “everything i know about painting”. its a good book about colour theory, picking your colours properly, in which situations you will be decieved by certain colours, when to choose a cooler colour or not, edge quality, etc.
its rather highly based on trying to do the most with the least strokes ( but highly planned strokes ).

another book is more based on figure drawing, but it has a very good section on shading and lighting. ( and i actually like how he goes about refining his forms as well ). its called “the artists complete guide to figure drawing” by anthony ryder.

#13

ambient-whisper

Thanks for your kind reply.

In regards to your info-- You are right… I never learned figure drawing… Ever. I suppose that truly shows a very uneasy balance in my work from painting to painting. As I mentioned before, I am self-taught and somehow managed to work my way around the figure poses by making sure I had good references, or what not.

In the last year in a half I have become very interested in figure drawing, especially as I recently started getting more into Frank Frazetta and Ken Kelly. In Frank’s book, and on his “Painting With Fire” video he references how strong his understanding of anatomy is to where he does not NEED reference photos. That’s how I want to be.

I learned the human face, and stopped there. The huge irony is that I plugged right into commercial art without skipping a beat and am known as being extremely fast by my clients. My main work over the past 5 years has been storyboards and animatics… But being a true artist at heart, I really want to get back to the basics and refine my art knowledge.

Regarding the photorealism thing— I learned how to do that as far back as 12 yrs old with an Ebony pencil. The big deal with that is that I can freehand draw and paint a portrait of a person in just a few hours without tracing and going crazy with any kind of measuring devices. I just start with an eye and work my way out. For me, it has always been very good self-discipline of training the eye to see all of that, and properly translate it back down from scratch completely freehand on a white canvas. Take for example this picture:
http://www.chrisscalf.com/illustration/layne.html

In the early days (before computers) when I was an airbrush artist-- young, trying to get a few bucks here and there painting portraits— people would hand me these flash-camera taken pictures to paint. They were the hardest thing to do! No sense of shadows and depth to work from. So frustrating!! But that is what drives me. The challenge. So when I do these photo-real pics, I tend to choose the obscure “average joe photography” type of pics as that much more of a challenge rather than a photo that has a multiple light source bouncing around like this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFXjOi0d1DY

Anyway-- having said all of that— my latest challenge is anatomy. I want to be able to memorize/master anatomy. I have Lightwave down… I’m learning Zbrush and 3DS Max… But I know that in order to make those programs truly work, I have to have a good understanding of anatomy. I will investigate the books you recommend.

But most of all, I really wanted to assure you all that what you see on those vids and on the website are the way it is… I really am freehand drawing those things without tracing a photo!!! If you look at my youtube channel, you’ll notice a couple of acrylic paintings I put on there, cuz I got a few comments where people suspected my digital portraits were fake, and that I was hiding a photo in the layer. I figured that if people could actually see my paint with a brush, they would hopefully deduce thatif an artist could make a quick drying medium such as acrylic work for him so well, why would he be insecure enough to try and fake anything?

Anyway-- I look forward to posting some of my CGI for feedback on here.

Thanks again.

#14

i gotta say, its really refreshing when an artist doesnt take the comments by others personally. there are a lot of people who would have pushed back.

i also struggle with a number of things when it comes to sketching and painting. my main weakness is perspective and poses together. painting with light is also something i really struggle with.
as long as we understand our weaknesses, we can work on becoming better artists.

cheers.

#15

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.